Analog vs. digital segment on PBS

Edo,

Thanks I missed it by ten minutes on TV last night. So I am glad you posted that link.

This was very well done.

=> Analog and Digital can both sound excellent!!!

In this case it seems they were indistinguishable in a short listening test...although they used headphones which increases the chance of hearing a difference)

The Wired Science findings only confirm what we know already (but some people still pretend that Analog is somehow inherently superior - it certainly has nostalgic appeal and may reflect most accurately the way historical music actually sounded when it was first issued).

In fact the main advantages of each format are well presented in the discussion. Glad to see they did not attack either format, as both have their merits.

well then, thank goodness the debate is finally over and done with... (btw, they both can, at times, sound miserable as well).
imho it was predominately more of a "money" issue than anything else.

The Wired Science findings only confirm what we know already...

That Analog is and has been the standard and digital has finally caught up but is NOT superior to analog.

It was interesting and disappointing at the same time.

Interesting was the analog engineer saying that he could incorporate the same "effects" as the digital engineer. Then the digital engineer says - so what - "I can do it quicker and easier and you can't tell the difference". "I can even add effects to make it sound "analog"", which implies he hears a difference.

Disappoining was the short "verse" based testing and the non-blind nature of letting 2 people review at the same time. I can't pick out subtle differences in 10 to 20 second listens (tin ear, low res system?). Can you? Standing side by side and showing your choice visually has to exert some influence on the other listener.

I would have been a lot more anal about the test procedure.

Jim S.

Interresting but the test was between masters in a studio, not between the end products of CD and LP, which is what the average and above average listener would be using respectively. :D

Using a different type of music may have helped to reveal differences. I've always found analog to be much better at reproducing ambient venue sounds, hall sounds, or 'air' vs CD's of the same recordings.

Of course there are many different degrees (sampling rates, word lengths) of digital. The test did not indicate (that I saw) what was being used and if it was what a consumer would get with a red book CD.